If this has been discussed recently, my apologies...don't spend much time on the forums as of late.

I would like to throw out the idea of allowing coaches to have the ability to change the primary position of a player for his college career.

I just don't see the logic (especially at the lower divisions) of locking a player forever into his HS playing position. I see DIII recruits every season listed as a SG that are much better suited at PG, etc. WIS has confirmed (I believe) that playing a player out of position does carry some penalty...so why not simply give us the ability to change that position?

Just some random ideas:

• Make position changes a part of the recruiting process. Some kids will not care if they are switched and others, who insist on playing a particular position, will balk at the idea. Just like a redshirt inform. Any position change must be done prior to the 1st non-con game.

• Not part of the recruiting process but any position change must be done prior to the 1st non-con game. The player can drop in WE if they don't like the move, again similar to a redshirt done after recruiting ends.

• Not part of the recruiting process and the player will have no say in the matter...coach's decision. Any position change must be done prior to the 1st non-con game.

My limited time playing Hardball Dynasty (very poorly I might add) just made me realize this is something that could be incorporated into HD.

Any thoughts?

I don't think WIS should give player arbitrary positions to begin with.

I like the idea, and would ad that a coach should be able to change positions only once per player. The one problem I see is coaches changing a 6' 11" C to PG and then the next coach of that team having to fix the mistakes, but I still believe it could be done.

love the idea, i wasn't aware there was a penalty for playing someone out of position, either way maybe the best solution is to only list players during recruiting as Guard and Forward...then upon arriving on campus you assign them a position.

This could also add a wrinkle to recruiting ie, maybe a kid wants to be a PG but really is an off guard, well maybe give a little more love in recruiting to the team that promises him he will be a PG when he arrives on campus

You only get a penalty for playing a guy two spots out of position i believe. You can play SGs and PG without a penalty. I don't see many that should be SFs and I dont see many SGs that should be PFs. It just seems like it wouldn't add much to the game because you can already play a guy one spot out of position.

Quote: Originally posted by zhawks on 4/03/2010I don't think WIS should give player arbitrary positions to begin with.

I agree with this.

I liked this idea pre-potential... now it doesn't really make much difference because a player's potential essentially determines his skill set. In the old days--come join me in a rocking chair on the porch with a glass of lemonade--you could practice up a center in BH and PER if you so desired and perhaps play him at the 3 by his senior season. Made it a lot more fun as far as molding together a team.

Quote: Originally posted by zhawks on 4/03/2010I don't think WIS should give player arbitrary positions to begin with.

They need to for recruit rankings, it keeps things more realistic.

Quote: Originally posted by tkimble on 4/03/2010You only get a penalty for playing a guy two spots out of position i believe. You can play SGs and PG without a penalty. I don't see many that should be SFs and I dont see many SGs that should be PFs. It just seems like it wouldn't add much to the game because you can already play a guy one spot out of position.

Agreed. Find me many solid examples of listed PGs that should be SFs, SG's that should be PFs or SFs that should be Cs....

Quote: Originally Posted By bradshaw3001 on 4/03/2010I liked this idea pre-potential... now it doesn't really make much difference because a player's potential essentially determines his skill set. In the old days--come join me in a rocking chair on the porch with a glass of lemonade--you could practice up a center in BH and PER if you so desired and perhaps play him at the 3 by his senior season. Made it a lot more fun as far as molding together a team

I'll somewhat concede, but even today I run across times when an SF could play center or I would like to run a 4 guard lineup. If I'm going to play a center at position X the entire season, just let me designate him as that.

Lemonade sounds good, I liked the pre-potential version of this game very much.

Quote: Originally Posted By asher413 on 4/03/2010

Quote: Originally posted by tkimble on 4/03/2010
You only get a penalty for playing a guy two spots out of position i believe. You can play SGs and PG without a penalty. I don't see many that should be SFs and I dont see many SGs that should be PFs. It just seems like it wouldn't add much to the game because you can already play a guy one spot out of position.

Agreed. Find me many solid examples of listed PGs that should be SFs, SG's that should be PFs or SFs that should be Cs....

So having a bunch of centers on your team (even if half of them really play PF) will have no impact in trying to recruit another center? Perhaps I am incorrect but I thought a recruit was somewhat influenced by the existing roster...meaning where they would potentially be on the depth chart.

As an aside, a few years ago, a DI team was comprised of 12 SFs and did pretty well.

Quote: Originally posted by tmacfan12 on 4/03/2010

Quote: Originally posted by zhawks on 4/03/2010I don't think WIS should give player arbitrary positions to begin with.

They need to for recruit rankings, it keeps things more realistic.

ummmm. no, nice try,

Sounds like some of you guys are attributing too much importance to the listed positions...you can play guys out of position one spot with zero penalty, and out of position 2 spots with minor penalty.

Check out my D3 Greensboro team, defending national champion in Tark. I currently have 5 PGs, 1 SG, and 1 SF on the roster. My starting SG is a PG, my starting C is a PF, and my starting SF is a PG:

William Pirkle PG-->SF

PG 44 70 31 35 14 32 43 80 39 45 93

He was the leading scorer playing at SF on a NC team last season. If a guy has the numbers to play a position, try him there.

Listed position does not prevent you from playing a guy elsewhere.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Quote: Originally posted by zhawks on 4/03/2010I don't think WIS should give player arbitrary positions to begin with.

Could not agree more! Players are either guards, bigs or wings. Its the coaches decision on where each player fits best based off of their core ratings.